Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree with this statement. There are numerous examples of low income zip codes in cities that become gentrified and their level of affluence increases.
The qualifications of people that populate an area definitely matter.
Gentrification is the process of making a neighborhood more afffluent. People with more money, typically people that own rather than rent, displace those with less money, make improvements to the property and the property values rise. I don't see how gentrification disproves anything.
I'm not playing semantics if you and others can keep claiming that this is/will be taught in schools then provide a link to show where it is being included in that districts curriculum. Otherwise this is just a social media hype with CRT being the new "call to arms' that the conservatives are rallying around...
Gentrification is the process of making a neighborhood more afffluent. People with more money, typically people that own rather than rent, displace those with less money, make improvements to the property and the property values rise. I don't see how gentrification disproves anything.
Children who grow up in a gentrified neighborhood are not likely to end up poor.
So, this disproves that the zip code you grow up in determines your destiny.
I asked for a syllabus at curriculum night for my daughter's history/English class. They said 'It's student driven'. BS!!! I can't find a student anywhere that asks to talk about racism/slavery for over half the school year. Do you think they were doing that?
I don't know enough about CRT to agree or disagree with you. I have to ASSUME that your statement is part true, part false. To hear the other side explain it, all CRT is supposed to is teach what actually happened. I support that.
If (and I doubt it does) CRT ACTUALLY says that we should feel guilty, or other subjective things, I don't agree with that. I'm sure some would like to send that message, but I don't think that is the primary goal.
As I posted before: We should teach all that happened, and it is FACT that we as a country did a lot of things to hold blacks and other groups back. That's a fact. We should teach it. We can even acknowledge it was wrong, and hopefully teach what has been done to correct it. But schools should not teach you to feel guilty. I SUSPECT what is really happening is that PEOPLE are feeling guilty, or FEELING like people are wanting them to feel guilty. That is on them.
I stand by my earlier post: We can't dumb down our education because half the country is too emotionally fragile to know some of the darker truths about our history. That is not a reason.
Do you think they should spend over half the year in a history class teaching it?
Were they done a specific injustice and someone else took what was theirs? And is there ongoing damage? I think that's the difference.
It's like a divorce in which the husband has to pay alimony because he didn't let the wife work for 20 years, demanded she stay home. It doesn't matter if he relented in year 21, even though she's free to get any job she wanted in year 21+, she can never get those career-building years 1-20 back. So he owes her money to balance things out.
Bad analogy. It's NOTHING like that. You are not asking the husband to pay the $$. You are demanding that ALL men pay it. BAD analogy.
If you look at CRT as a media phenomenon, it fits very nicely into various right wing tropes that have been going on for a while. As I said, very similar to the various grievances and bugbears that fit into what used to be called "political correctness." It used to be gender issues and feminism back when sexism was a bigger concern of the left back in 2016 continuing through the MeToo movement. But now that had declined and the left is interested in race issues. Rufo just got the ball rolling in a somewhat more organized way. Somebody had to start it. CRT as an academic concept has been around over 40 years.... and just NOW it is an issue? That was clever marketing and he hit a nerve.
I see the whole things a pop culture reaction on the right in answer to the success of anti-racism books in pop culture in 2020 as a reaction to Floyd. Most notably - Robin DiAngelo's "White Fragility" and Kendi's "How to Be an Anti-Racist." Yeah, there's some CRT in that stuff. Moreso in DiAngelo, she's more of huckster, while she also comes from academia it's somewhat more fringe for her. Before her book she made her career in corporate trainings as a "consultant."
Kendi is more of a legitimate academic and has risen up its ranks; it just so happened that his research and publishing was on the stuff that people all of a sudden got excited about in 2020.
So what IS the whole thing about? That's the part I don't get.
It's okay to discuss past racism. Got it. It's okay to discuss current racism in terms of sociology. Got it. So it sounds like educating people about racism is not the problem.
So I'm confused WHAT is the problem, precisely?
The problem is teaching our kids that just by virtue of being born white, they are racist.
Let's be honest. NONE of this is about helping blacks. It's about power for white elites and those blacks who are chosen to be in the club, like Kamala.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
